Explain the differences between cost-utility analysis (CUA) and cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and which you think would be more appropriate for an evaluation of a public health intervention targeted at year 10 pupils (age 15-16) at risk of alcohol misuse and to be delivered in schools. Your answer should identify ONE relevant public health intervention (see below) for the specified population and health need, in ONE country (United States). The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommends the use of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) to quantify the effectiveness of health care interventions and a health and social care perspective. In contrast, analysts are recommended to take a wider societal perspective in the evaluation of public health interventions; options for the economic analysis of public health interventions include cost-utility analysis (CUA) and cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Make references to the following publications:NICE (2018). Guide to the processes of technology appraisal.https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg19/chapter/forewordNICE (2012). Methods for the development of NICE public health guidance [Chapter 6].https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg4/chapter/incorporating-health-economicsYour choice of intervention and context are important in as far as they frame the discussion of CUA versus CBA. Keep the explanation of the intervention brief, including only the information necessary to justify the choices relevant to the economic evaluation. Your main focus and thus the bulk of the essay, should be on providing a sound and reasoned argument for the application of the chosen economic evaluation approach. Use tables and figures to illustrate relevant data.
The intervention is: In the United States, Boston Public High School has put in place Alcohol Education and Training Sessions, delivered 3 times a week, as an intervention method targeted towards students aged 15-16 at risk of alcohol misuse.
